The National Audit Office's report on admission to police training

Petter Löberg (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have received a report from the National Audit Office on the floor of the Riksdag which was already submitted to the government this spring, on May 20. Since then, the government has been pondering it, and now it has been submitted to the Chamber. We are to take a position on it. There are also some comments from the government, which we will return to.

This is not just a technical report. It is about a process that, in the worst case, makes two mistakes simultaneously. It can prevent future capable police officers from entering the police training and thus having a good professional life and doing good for society. And it may not work when it comes to being a gatekeeper and ensuring that people who should not be able to become police officers still become police officers. These are otherwise the two goals one has with the recruitment. There are also volume goals that we politicians set together with the authority.

The National Audit Office has its efficiency glasses on. They are supposed to promote good housekeeping, as it is called in old-fashioned Swedish.

The agency has quite a few balancing acts to manage when selecting individuals for police training.

Regarding efficiency, some proposals and arguments will be presented concerning moving the security interview earlier in the process so as not to let people go through a number of steps and consume psychological resources and other things when it might still be impossible for them to become police officers. It is one aspect of the whole. Efficiency is also about the fact that we must not miss out on competencies. It is fundamental, I think, in this entire report.

The police need to be able to handle everything from honor-related issues to mental illness and organized crime in different ways. In that work, context understanding, communication skills, and other things are naturally required to make it as good as possible. It is not just soft values; it is quite hard operational capabilities when it comes down to it.

A police officer who can read a situation and understands the codes wins trust, can de-escalate conflicts, and prevent crime. That officer should perhaps also investigate in time. This is where the need for diversity comes in. It is a word that is not particularly fashionable today, Mr. Speaker. Many people think it is almost a pejorative. But to have a police force that understands many cultural codes and also languages is a police force that is better equipped to handle the challenges one is faced with.

The Swedish National Audit Office's observations are quite tough. The audit shows that not only people with an immigrant background but also women risk being disadvantaged by, for example, physical fitness tests, and that a disproportionately large share of people with a foreign background are filtered out in connection with the psychological tests, even though it actually cannot be explained by other variables such as grades or the Higher Education Examination. There, we have not only a problem for the individuals who disappear but perhaps also a systemic problem in the selection processes.

The police force's legitimacy is in many ways connected to who is working and which police officers people in society encounter. Therefore, one may perhaps need to review the processes. This is also written by the Swedish National Audit Office in several places.

Another issue that is highlighted is the so-called "trapdoor principle." One might not pass one moment, but is good at others. However, a holistic assessment of the person's overall or complementary qualities is not made. A single part that one is poor at can therefore cause one to fall through, even though one could become an excellent police officer. This is something that the National Audit Office also points out. The Government takes this to heart.

However, the government may not listen to some of the arguments and recommendations. We Social Democrats, for example, agree on the issue of volume targets. It is fundamentally about setting volume targets based on the EU average and defining what constitutes a police officer and a security guard, respectively, and other professional groups. The clear goal of 10,000 police employees has been a success factor, even though the Swedish National Audit Office has viewed it as a red flag, not just in this report. They do not think it is the right way to manage. But it meant that we in Sweden today are in a much better position when it comes to being able to combat crime.

In summary, Mr. Speaker: Generally speaking, we Social Democrats want an admission to the police training with the improvements I have described, which would make it occupationally relevant, legally secure, and resource-efficient. Ultimately, the admission process is not an isolated event, but it is, in the final analysis, about how well the police manage their societal mission.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mats Hellhoff (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Initially, I would like to vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report in its entirety.

The referral deals with the Swedish National Audit Office's report on the admission to the police training. The Swedish National Audit Office's overall conclusion is that the admission to the police training is not effective, and in the report, they make a number of observations in support of that position.

One also submits two recommendations to the government in the matter: firstly, to carry out a review of the growth target that the Swedish Police Authority shall achieve a police density that at least corresponds to the average in the EU, and secondly, to carry out a review of the funding of the Swedish Crime Police Authority's [Plikt- och prövningsverket] capacity for police examinations.

The Government partially agrees with the National Audit Office's assessment that the goal is associated with challenges. It is considered necessary to ensure more police officers and an increased police presence throughout the country, and therefore judges that the current growth target should remain. Very well, I also think so; we need more police officers in outer service throughout the country.

When it comes to the recommendation to the government regarding a review of the financing of the Swedish Crime-Free Sweden Authority's (Plikt- och prövningsverket) testing capacity for police tests, the government intends to initiate a review of the financing model and propose a cost-effective and more flexible and needs-based model that better reflects actual demand and utilization rate.

In the report, three critical observations are made regarding the admission.

Firstly: It is not ensured that the recruitment process is adapted to select candidates who are suitable for the police profession.

Secondly: The admission process can become more efficient – I share that view.

For the third: The admission process does not promote good management – that also seems to be true.

I intend to only stick to the first observation, and the big question becomes, Mr. Speaker: Who is a suitable candidate for the police profession, and how can one know that?

The Swedish National Audit Office argues that it is unclear what lies behind the choice of tests and decided threshold values and argues that the physical tests are not adapted to the police profession. It continues that the government's desire for increased diversity in the police force, with more women and people with a foreign background, has not been translated into practice.

Here, I mean, the Police Authority has been assigned an insoluble task. One cannot include in the admission process for the training everything that will be required of a police officer in the future. The police profession is fundamentally very complex, with a multitude of different specializations that require both specialized knowledge and experience. To include all of this in an admission process simply cannot be done. The admission requirements would then become unattainable for the vast majority.

Mr. Speaker! The formal requirements are difficult enough to achieve, which is good; it should be difficult to become a police officer. But the Swedish National Audit Office suggests that some of the requirements disadvantage certain categories of applicants and seems to think that the Police Authority should change this. This would in fact mean either positive discrimination for some to facilitate their recruitment or a lowering of certain basic requirements for the same purpose.

One is then forced to raise the question of whether gender, ethnicity, or some other innate characteristic should be a factor, in this case a positive factor, in the admission process. Or should the basic requirements be lowered generally to facilitate the admission of certain categories and facilitate for the authority to fulfill the goal of a higher police density throughout the country?

The police officers I speak with – some retired, like myself, and others very much active – think the opposite. They argue that the requirements should instead be tightened and that this should be prioritized over the goal of a higher police density.

Mr. Speaker! To admit someone who does not meet the formal requirements or pass the basic tests through quotas or any other form of positive discrimination, I mean, is completely excluded. The same applies to lowering the requirements in fact and meaning so that more in a certain group or of a certain gender shall be approved upon admission.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Charlotte Nordström (M)

Mr. Speaker! When we send our children to school, go for an evening walk in town, take us home from the night shift, or sleep at night, we should feel safe. Safety is a fundamental right for all citizens, regardless of where one lives in Sweden. This safety rests largely on the fact that we have a strong, competent, and well-functioning police force.

To build such a police force, it is not only necessary to have more police officers but also the right police officers – police officers with the ability to handle today's complex crime, police officers with both physical strength and mental resilience, police officers who represent our entire society and whom all citizens have confidence in.

That is why the admission process to the police training is so crucial and important. It lays the foundation for our entire future police force. Every admission made today determines who will wear the uniform and serve on Sweden's streets in three, five, or ten years.

Mr. Speaker! The committee, like the government, welcomes the Swedish National Audit Office's review of the admission to the police training. It is a comprehensive report that gives us valuable insights into how the system functions today, and also regarding certain deficiencies. And these deficiencies and observations are taken most seriously.

The report's conclusion is that the admission to the police training is not effective. It is argued that it is not ensured that the process is adapted to select candidates who are suitable for the police profession. This is a serious finding. We cannot accept a system where resources are wasted, testing capacity stands unused, and potentially unsuitable candidates risk slipping through while suitable candidates fall away unnecessarily.

The National Audit Office recommends that the current growth target for police density be reviewed. Here, I want to be clear about both the government's and my own position. Sure, I can partly agree that the target is associated with challenges, as there are variations regarding who is counted as a police officer in different countries. And the target changes over time – that is entirely correct.

But at the same time, with the societal challenges we have, it is not reasonable that Sweden is one of the countries in the EU that has the lowest police density. We see the consequences of this in the form of gang crime, shootings, and an insecurity that has spread throughout our society.

I fully agree with the government that it is therefore necessary with a target figure to ensure more police and an increased police presence throughout our country, in order to push back crime. The government assesses that the current growth target should remain, and we cannot wait to increase the number of police while we discuss exactly how the target should be formulated.

In this context, one should also highlight the government's initiatives to strengthen the police and make the police profession more attractive. This involves things such as paid police training, an investment in the conditions for police recruits, and that an additional police training center shall be established.

The National Audit Office's second recommendation is that the financing of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority's testing capacity be reviewed. That the financing should be dimensioned based on actually performed tests can be thought to be obvious already today. The Government agrees that a purposeful and cost-effective financing of the operations is needed, and will therefore take the initiative for a review of the financing model and propose, as has been stated here, a model that is more cost-effective, more flexible and need-adapted, and thus better reflects actual demand and utilization rate.

The Government also agrees with the assessment that the screening capacity, at least in the current situation, should not be further expanded as a result of an increased number of places in the police training. First, one must really ensure that the existing capacity is used effectively.

The National Audit Office also notes that the Swedish Police Authority has not produced a comprehensive work analysis for the police profession and that this has follow-on effects regarding the requirements profile and the choice of tests and threshold values. This is fundamental. It is quite clear: In order to be able to assess who is suitable for the police profession, there must be a clear picture of what the profession actually requires.

Mr. Speaker! The Swedish National Audit Office also points out problems with information sharing between the Swedish Police Authority and the Swedish Police Authority. They point out that the secrecy surrounding the psychological interview, which today prevents the authorities from sharing information, creates uncertainty and hinders the possibility of detecting unsuitable candidates. They argue that there is legal room to share such information, and I just say: Do it! It is important that it is actually done.

The authorities must develop their cooperation so that relevant information regarding the candidates' suitability can be shared. Here I have listened to my colleagues who are police officers: Let the police be involved in the selection together with the psychologists! Then perhaps the accuracy will be slightly better.

But there is one more unreasonable detail in the process, and that is that applicants who are not approved do not get to know why. It is absurd. It must be ensured that they receive sufficient information about why they were not accepted. It is not reasonable for people to apply again and again without understanding why they are not being accepted – is it about something they can improve, or is it that there are circumstances that mean they will never be able to be approved? This is a waste of both their time and society's resources. This has bothered me for many years.

The Swedish Police Authority has decided on a proper review of the entire admission process to the police training. That is good. The Government will follow this review very closely and is prepared to take further measures if needed. It is not ruled out that there may be reasons to return to the question of whether the admission process can be further improved.

In summary, the committee views positively the initiatives and steps that the government and the Police Authority intend to take regarding the observations that the National Audit Office has made to ensure that admission to the police training becomes as effective and fair as possible.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden's citizens deserve a police force they can trust. It is a police force that is well-educated, competent and representative of the whole society. This begins by getting the recruitment process in order.

I move for approval of the committee's proposal to submit the government's communication to the records, and I move for the rejection of the motion with reference to ongoing work.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ulrika Liljeberg (C)

Mr. Speaker! The police have an important and often decisive role in creating and restoring safety for all of us in Sweden. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all police officers and police employees for the efforts they make around the clock, all year round, for all of us in Sweden: A big thank you!

We in the Center Party have stood behind the historically large and much-needed increased resources for the Swedish police which are now being realized. In 2022, the police budget was 32 billion. This year it is 48 billion. That is a 50 percent increase. An important part of the expansion is that we are to have more police officers.

What we are debating today is the Swedish National Audit Office's report on the admission to the police training. It is certainly no light reading. It states that it is not ensured that the admission process is adapted to select suitable candidates for the police profession. The National Audit Office simply says that there is no comprehensive analysis of what the police profession requires or what profile of requirements should be had. Furthermore, the report states that the admission process could be more efficient and that it does not promote good management. The criticism is therefore serious. What is needed is the right profile of requirements, the right competence, and the right conditions.

Mr. Speaker! Crime is evolving. We still have the robbery crimes, which affect residents and small business owners throughout our country. We have the violence against children and the violence against women. This requires a stable and competent basic staffing of police officers across the entire country.

But we also have the growing organized crime which is increasing. It is said that the crimes are becoming fewer but worse. It is about advanced corporate structures, digital crimes and international crimes. This requires significantly more from our police. It requires new capabilities and new qualities, but it also requires a police force with knowledge and experience. We therefore have a more advanced crime.

This should also be seen in light of the fact that half of today's police officers have been in service for less than ten years. Most police officers who leave the profession do so to go into retirement. A police officer in the statistics can be an officer with over 40 years of experience, but it can also be an officer with only four months of experience. This obviously has an impact, and it is nothing we can take lightly.

That is why the Centre Party believes that the quantified goal should be supplemented with other goals, so that we can better measure the police force's capabilities. All of this also means that the selection and the training are absolutely crucial. There lies a great responsibility on the current government and the incoming government to ensure that it becomes an effective and purposeful training, both regarding the selection and the content of the training.

I want to take this opportunity to highlight police training, that is, what takes place after recruitment. With an expansion of the Swedish Police Authority, more people need to be trained, and more police training programs are also needed. It was considered that police training was needed at an additional university. Police training is available at five locations: Malmö, Växjö, Borås, Huddinge and Umeå.

The government then said that they desired an additional school and that it should be in Central Sweden. At that point, Örebro University, Dalarna University and Gävle University raised their hands and declared that they were prepared to start a new police training. But the government chose Uppsala, the country's fourth largest city, which is located approximately 30 minutes from Stockholm's city center.

This is another example that the government and SD do not see the importance of the whole country and that not everything needs to be located in the country's largest cities. We question the government's regional policy when, in this initiative, it is not seen that academic infrastructure, such as a new police academy, is of the utmost importance for mid-sized Swedish cities like Falun, Gävle, and Örebro. We regret this.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The National Audit Office has submitted a substantial but also strongly critical report on the current police training, in which they point out a number of deficiencies.

It was said by the previous speaker that they were police officers with short experience. But some have long experience, up to 40 years. I am one of those who has 40 years of experience in police work. It is clear that it has shaped my view on recruitment, training, and admission in police work.

Changes have occurred over time. When I was hired once upon a time, one was hired directly and received their education after the employment. One received a salary during that time. In 1998, I believe it was, they changed the education. They introduced a police degree and had police students. Shortly thereafter, Södertörn University received the first police training. I believe they had police programs in Umeå and Växjö as well.

When it comes to this reorganization, there were many pressures from the Police Union, which wanted the police to have a more academic touch to the whole thing. They actually wanted a university education, and they also wanted academic credits. The latter has not been achieved; instead, one goes through the police program as a police student and receives their degree but no academic credits.

This began in 2015. In 2018, the Swedish Defence Readyness Administration took over the admission process. The Swedish Defence Readiness Administration was primarily responsible for the conscription of those subject to military service but then also had to take charge of the admission process for the police training. I can understand the reasoning to some extent, but I still find it strange that the Swedish Police Authority, as the employer, largely delegates the entire application and admission process to another agency and does not have the responsibility itself.

It is noteworthy that the police interviewers state that they are discovering more and more people who should not be police officers in connection with the security interview being conducted. One reason for this is, according to them, that more candidates are approved in the psychology interview as a result of changes in the requirements profile. Here I argue that a review is required and that the Swedish Police Authority becomes more involved in the process to the extent that the Inspectorate of Duty and Security shall continue to have the current responsibility.

Mr. Speaker! Today we actually have several authorities involved in the recruitment, admission, and training of police officers. It is the Swedish Police Authority. It is, as mentioned, the Inspectorate of Prisons and Probation and also a number of universities. It is now being expanded further with Uppsala, which was mentioned by the previous speaker. It is sometimes said: The more cooks, the worse the soup. There may be some truth to that proverb in this context. Against the background of the National Audit Office's criticism, there may be reason to consider whether that is the case specifically with police training.

An example that is perhaps practical and which is pointed out in the report is the issue of the exclusion of police students who are judged to be unsuitable, where the educational institutions make different assessments. Some educational institutions have developed their own assessments of what is considered suitable and not suitable. From the Police Authority's side, meetings have been held with the educational institutions to try to obtain information on how to handle this. But from the Police Authority's side, it is perceived that there is a resistance from the universities' side to hand over that information in a good way. It does not benefit the police operations, one might think. And in my world, it becomes at least problematic if the future employer does not have the final word in such an important issue.

Overall, one can question the value of placing police training at a number of universities. I would like to see the police, similar to the Armed Forces, have their own university for admission, training, and research. It can be located outside the city but with the Police Authority as the owner and an increased focus on vocational training rather than academic education, even if the latter is required in certain parts.

Based on my own experiences, I am of the opinion that the education and recruitment must become more operationally adapted. As mentioned by a previous speaker, police work is very broad. It is a broad spectrum of work tasks and challenges in the profession. There is a big difference depending on where in the police operations one is active. One should perhaps then consider adapting the education and recruitment in a completely different way.

Madam Speaker! There is reason to devote some time to the tests included in the admission process. The language test, which consisted of reading a text and answering a number of questions linked to it, has been scrapped. Likewise, the requirement for passing the aptitude test has been lowered. The somewhat troubling explanation is that they want to increase the conditions for filling the places in the police training. It is, therefore, quantity before quality. One can wonder whether it serves the operation in the long run.

The requirement for history was also removed. It was considered to constitute an obstacle for suitable applicants. An update of the aptitude test was also made in 2022.

In practice, the change means that it does not require as many credits to obtain a so-called "trea" and thus pass the threshold for passing the police training.

The Swedish National Audit Office also criticizes the "falluck principle," which the Agency for Duties and Examinations uses. I am inclined to agree that it is better to make a holistic assessment. Norway is mentioned as a good example – there, these tests are carried out in a good way. There is reason to review this as well.

It is also noteworthy that police interviewers who conducted the security interviews with the candidates previously did not have the authorization to perform register checks. How did they think about that? One might wonder. Here we have people who are to enter a profession where they are to be responsible for the state's internal security, and then they are not allowed to perform register checks. Thank goodness the government has now changed that, so now that matter will be sorted out. But that this is even being questioned at all is something one can reflect upon.

Madam Speaker! In summary, I am of the opinion that the responsibility for recruitment and admission should be returned to the Swedish Police Authority, which shall then be provided with the necessary competence for the task. I also believe, as I said earlier, that the police in Sweden should have a dedicated police academy – similar to the Armed Forces, which has a defense academy – and that it should not be a mission-based training at a number of our universities, as it is today.

I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Martin Melin (L)

Madam Speaker! Actually, perhaps there isn't that much for us to debate here today. It might rather be about reflecting on what the Swedish National Audit Office has concluded in its review of the admissions to the police training. It is a report that arrived last year.

There is a lot of criticism in the report. I have myself gone through a version of the selection process when I applied for the police training. It was 35 years ago, but the process then was very similar to the one today.

I have also been one of those who have conducted these selections. I have, therefore, conducted such interviews with applicants to the police training. I therefore have some insight into the process, and I also have some opinions about the process. That being said, I think the Riksrevisionen's report and the criticism they mention is quite justified.

It is somewhat interesting that the Swedish National Audit Office's criticism includes the concerns that I and many others of the police who were involved in police recruitment 17–18 years ago pointed out. One of these, which the Swedish National Audit Office highlights, is that we should not let the Swedish Defence Defence Agency (Pliktverket) handle the recruitment. It was a mistake that this was handed over to the Swedish Defence Defence Agency from the Police Authority. The Swedish National Audit Office emphasizes exactly this extra clearly in its report.

The other point also pointed out in the report is a deficiency that I and many others with me pointed out is not good with today's system, namely that an applicant to the police training today can drop out in the selection process without a holistic assessment of the applicant having been made.

It is one thing if you, for example, are to perform the physical tests and cannot even manage to tie your shoes – if I may be a bit sarcastic. I understand that one might then perhaps have to come back another time when one has trained a bit. But let us take the swimming test as an example. In that, one must swim and perform life-saving and so on, and one has seven minutes. If one then lies just below the requirements set for the segment and performs the test in 7 minutes and 20 seconds, perhaps one can be judged as passed and then be given time during the course of the training to come back and show that one has trained and can manage the seven minutes. That is to say that one makes an overall assessment.

It is not entirely unusual that this is done when one applies for a position internally within the Swedish Police Authority. In those cases, one often looks at the applicant's potential. If one misses on the shooting segments, one can train up, and when one has received the new position, one can come and show that one can handle the weapon. I think that is very good. As it is now, applicants fall out of the police training at every segment. It is likely that several people who would become good and capable police officers are not admitted. As said: Look at the potential!

Madam Speaker! Some of the heaviest components in the recruitment process are the final interviews, or the security talks as they are called now, and the psychological interviews. The National Audit Office highlights in its criticism that no dialogue currently takes place between the police officers who conduct interviews and the psychologist who conducts talks with the applicant.

When the Police Authority held the recruitments 17–18 years ago, the applicant first met two experienced police officers. They spoke for an hour, after which the officers made their assessment. Then the applicant went to the psychologist and had a one-hour conversation there. Immediately after this, the psychologist and the two police officers met, and they then sat together and discussed the applicant. The police officers could also make different assessments internally.

I was, as I said, one of the police officers who conducted these interviews. Most of the time we were three in very much agreement, but sometimes there was something that the psychologist had picked up on that we police had missed. Sometimes it was we police who thought something that the psychologist did not agree with. They were very good and constructive discussions, and most of the time we were actually in agreement.

One can read in the National Audit Office's report that they are requesting precisely this dialogue between the police and the psychologist. As I mentioned before, the applicant today can be disqualified after having only spoken with the psychologist. The police authority then do not get to know what it was that the psychologist did not like about the applicant.

Madam Speaker! It is difficult to become a police officer today. In 2024, 25,500 applied for the training, and 2,100 were admitted. Admittedly, there were many who applied who probably did not quite understand what they were applying for or what was required, as there were only 11,000 who were eligible. Of those 11,000, 2,100 were therefore admitted to the police.

In Sweden, we actually have the world's best police training. Our police officers are, as a result of this, among the best-educated in the world. We should be proud of that, but we must also safeguard it.

There are some things that I am reflecting on in the report. One example is that the language test was removed in 2016 and that the passing level on the aptitude test is set very low. These things must not be compromised. That the language test was removed is incomprehensible to me considering that a large part of police work involves drafting documents. It is documents that many people and authorities are to take part in and also make decisions with the help of. It is important to be able to use the Swedish language, not only in speech but also in writing.

Madam Speaker! After reading the report from the Swedish National Audit Office, I spoke with several experienced police officers. I spoke, among others, with those who work with newly graduated police officers. I wanted to hear their views on the criticism the report gave. They mean that today there is a big difference between different police officers who come from the police training. The vast majority are good. They are hungry, curious, knowledgeable, and well-suited for the profession. There are, however, also those who, to quote one police officer, perhaps are not quite suited for the profession. The interesting thing is that it is not about them being bad people. They are just not in the right place.

I finally want to say that I really hope that the Police Authority thinks of quality before quantity, regardless of whether the government is now cheering on and saying that we must train more police officers. It is about quality before quantity. My advice is to make the recruitment process better and ensure that the applicants' potential is met. Then this will solve itself, and we will be able to fill the police training with good and capable people.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 25 February.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)